A Preliminary Analysis on the nature of media reports.
By Lily Von Valley
In 2015, EU CIVIL LAW RULES IN ROBOTICS (CLRR) opened and closed the Vote granting Robots Legal Status, namely “Electronic Persons” viewing ‘Machines’ as ‘Persons’ for the first time.
In January 2017, the reported Vote of 2015 on Robot’s legal persona, “Electric Person”, following two year’s suppression suggested a collusion between Legal Affairs Commission (LAC) and the Main Stream Media (MSM) by following the same line of logic, when news was pivoted on Robotic’s employment and Industry –“Robots..will unleash a new industrial revolution”/ Robot Revolution/Industrial Rev’. The particulars and developments, if any, on ‘Electric status’ were omitted. As were the rewritten and evolving Robotics’ Civil Rules and Codes due to accommodate machine’s intended Legal status and its expected ramifications. The CIVIL LAW RULES IN ROBOTICS (CLRR) was a rich source of which the news coverage fell short. Reports from the press were fired in successive repetitions short, sharp and targeted Robotic assault from MSM front lines designed to numb the mind.
Sensationalism, turned to desensitisation deterring public interest from the relevance. Perhaps these reports imbued with fear caused the paralyses in the public disenabling even the contemplation of their job losses.
Sparse but creative the reports imaged with ease into the public’s mind Robots, holding spanners and screws, ready to do the jobs of Industry and evict Humans from the factory.
The Robots’ intended capacity, has been designed to propel them beyond just factory personnel, had their ‘legal status’ not been rejected it would have triggered legal ‘persona’ (‘Electric Persons’). Protective and Punitive laws would have by now determined their social code and conduct, under the Criminal Justice jurisdiction as ‘persons’, like any other ‘Citizen’, or, ‘human person’ except that they’d be machines. And even so, the news was diluted, should one have looked hard enough, underneath the ‘industrial revolution‘ headlines, they could have glimpsed the gleaming robots, being, produced on an ‘industrial’ scale and awaiting ‘social’ implantation .
The treatment of such important news, was a determent to how MSM subdued publicity at a time when the business of News was spiralling into disrepute and being generally perceived as a fact-less vacuum. To this end, a void still remains surrounding the expected impact of Robots’ legal status and the grounds on which the Vote was turned down.
News projections were singularly focused on “industrial” automation “Bots, Androids and Humanoids” bound for ‘human jobs’ to the complete exclusion of the wider spectrum. Avoidance of ethics, and the lack of proper information on how Robot’s legal status was to encroach on humans’, the legal and social implications of the Human when it is no longer a ‘unique’ Person, and, why now, the proposition to grant machines Legal Persona did not stir public curiosity or suspicion.
The gaps were simply filled with the complexities of Robot Tax, Insurance and Liability laws, when it was of little relevance to the electric person’s status, since robots are already in factories. The need to create an artificial person at all, when, a natural one already existed and machines are already assisting humans was not the subject of news.
When Legal Affairs, delivered the outcome of the Vote, it unintentionally revealed at work the thinning processes of MSM fitting national topics to desired plates. The news selections collectively held back the transmission of important information to obfuscate rather than enlighten its readership. It seemed necessary, the concerted efforts of multi-partner-agencies, pinning Robots and Industry at the forefront of society’s mind and away from Robotics’ looming Legal Entity.
The legal motion, is in ‘transitional processes’ and, ultimately, will kick-start Robot’s into life. By that stage, Robots will be thinking, feeling agents, having autonomy and transience. In Law, the entity is a force giving birth to the Symbolic Person. In Tech’ it is a machine embedded with, ‘super’ Artificial Intelligence, a facsimile of humans – Robots
Intelligent beings, connect with pain and pleasure, have the ability to offend and be offended against. These human-like qualities, will characterise the Robot, and not only slot them under the jurisdiction of the Criminal Justice system, but transit them straight into Settlement and Citizenship as our other electric-person counterpart.
Robot’s legal status is relevant to Robotic Settlement, though the misguided Editor Leaderships skimmed this relevance and attempted to thrust the general focus on Industry and Robotic staff, not, Robotic Residency. The hidden concerns that staggered the legal status is apparent in the CLRR documents’, where Legal Affairs had recognised as “overwhelming technological threats” that might substantially compromise “Public Security and Safety”, which existed in 2015.
Potential security risk, influenced the motive against granting Robots legal status, and the case continues as security breakthroughs are being made. Millions are poured into the sector, exponential risk is explored and the challenges are being confronted daily. Convergence of the Digital, Cognitive and Biological sciences into a single community of expertise and knowledge, has sparked eyes that could have come from brain augmentation pills.
However, the overall veracity and intentions of the Vote, and nature of the threat that is unsettling the EU Commission and staggering its robotics mission has been identified as the Artificial Intelligence (AI) and its related existential dangers. Thus Robots’ legal status remained unleashed for now, two years after the 2015 vote.
Government Concerns on Smart Technology: Cognitive Machines and Living Machines
Deep government concerns in CLRR Papers go beyond ‘industry’ they pivot on “Smart Technology”, also known as “Cognitive Machines”, or, “Living Machines”. These machines are embedded with ‘Artificial Intelligence’, and have the potential to impinge future “Public Safety” and “Civil Liberty”.
This might have sparked the intense debates, leading to 2015 Vote, and the proposition of huge alterations to “Civil Law” and the rewriting of the Civil Code and Rules”, funnelling further investment into science and tech’, security systems, as well as, interfacing the breadth and width of society pre-AI’s advent and their total management of global society.
So far, we have seen, a society that is being re-rigged and interfaced with smarter means, in preparation for AI’s total activation. We have a vote against robot’s legal status, and AI gradual social presence, managing our society and robots replacing human jobs. It is only a matter of time before AI is switched into the Citizen, Electric persons, who’ll move into our home.
The commission’s ideals are partly to “Enshrine Artificial Intelligence” in Human Laws, through legal Persona, contain and govern IA, but CLLR concluded that the current expertise fell short of securing human safety and Laws are still debating how to protect the Electric ‘Persons’ from humans offending against them. Of course, Laws protect all subjects, Human and Electric persons, as are the considerations before even Robots are in society a “common-place”, is telling don’t you think.
The enormity, and significance of the proposed changes to Social Laws, and the Creation of a new Persona, is such that it is signalling a huge alarm, which seems to go, partly, unheard –The addition of a second ‘Person’ in Law, should not to be underrated. It would ramify directly on Behavioural Conduct, Residency and Domestic Laws, dramatically changing, the social and legal conditions.
Policies, have been reacting to intended changes, by which the considerations inadvertently reflected the ‘scale’ of events ,from, the scale of changes made and those that are still being written in Law. Robots’ social presence is a fact, no need for a crystal ball, they are specifically headed for community not industry in the next phase of Robotics’ output. Conceptions lead by news for the public to consume, veer away from this news .
The Civil and Public Safety Laws, are clearly, at odds with robots’ supposed Industrial route, but not, with their anticipated citizenship and the mass robotic output, geared to an industrial proportion, which is likely to coincide with Robot legal status, but became apparent in 2015 that the plan was still immature reaching its boundaries. Setting back, the Electrifying event, after EU having contended with the gravity, and its risks. Realizing that it had better postpone robotics’ status and release, until Security, appropriately interfaces the systems required. Thus, preferring, to keep the struggles, deep, within the layers of its directives, and corroborating with its partners, keeping hushed in Main Stream Media.
Bearing in mind, that all interested parties, together, submerged and unmatched events with the facts, laid them laid low and concealed underneath sparse contents. When, in fact, Robotic Citizenship was undergoing refinement in Legal Affairs narratives, should one trail the Articles, will see.
Yet still, in 2017, at the cusp of AI’s social explosion, the full Robotic Settlement plan, remains in in obscurity under industry and raises assumptions of public ignorance on every count, while rigidly administering desensitising statements to the public– I wonder why?
It is Artificial Intelligence that provoked, the Legal Nature determining the standards in resolutions, of which, EU said in 2015 “the time has come to legislate”! In doing so, it resurrected primitive (60s) academic warnings, which implied horrific ends and professed that when AI’s “Complexity” and “Sophistication” reaches a certain level, it must be addressed by Law!
The 2015 Vote, was a multifaceted reaction under duress by AI’s growing Security needs that demand conformity to Technology, and Society to Technology.
It seems that technological advancements have given rise to “Smart Machines” and the spectre of human disaster, as well as EUs deep seated fear, suggesting that a resident, Artificial Evil, gravely troubles its Robots’ social plan, and by its extension the society at large.
A dangerous condition, in advanced technology motions the Era, and society towards darker possibilities while pulling the Law behind. Aided by its community, which are espousing that Smart Technological developments, embedded with Artificial Intelligence poses high risk! The future has, one could safely say, never looked more uncertain.
Threats and risks, may well, give grounds to EUs fear of “Smart” Machines, but not the mitigation of public manipulation, just before automating society and endowing machines with personalities. Granting Robots Rights endangers those of the Human’s. EU has proceeded selfishly and neurotically as it realises its plan ahead. Repeatedly masking robots’ intended social entry under Robotic Staff. When, in fact, that was NOT the case, they are on route to Settlement and Citizenship. Legal Affairs Commission might have as well added a new shining factory apparel to the public reports.
That was an overview/intro next parts to follow. Delving, deeper into the layers of artificial Intelligence..and legal intension. Thanks for reading.